| Applicant name | SZYPUŁA AND OTHERS |
| Applicant type | natural person |
| Number of applicants | |
| Country | Poland |
| Application no. | 78030/14 23669/16 |
| Date | 27/02/2025 |
| Judges | Erik Wennerström, President, Raffaele Sabato, Artūrs Kučs |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | Violation |
| Reason | Positive obligation |
| Type of privacy | Procedural privacy; private life |
| Keywords | Same sex marriage; lack of legal framework |
| Facts of the case | The applicants, who are in same-sex couples, complained principally under Article 8 of the Convention that Poland failed to provide them with a certificate allowing them to get married in Spain while in Poland there had been no form of legal recognition and protection for their respective relationships. |
| Analysis | The Court notes that, in Poland, same-sex couples, in the absence of official recognition, are mere de facto unions. Same-sex partners are not able to rely on the existence of their relationship in dealings with the judicial or administrative authorities. The Court reiterates that the need to apply to the domestic courts for protection of their couple’s ordinary needs is in itself an obstacle to respect for their private and family life. Referring to the findings already established by the Court in respect of Poland in the cases indicated above, it thus concludes that by failing to ensure that the applicants have a specific legal framework providing for recognition and protection, the Polish authorities have left them in a legal vacuum and have not provided for the core needs of recognition and protection of same-sex couples in a stable and committed relationship. The Court finds that none of the public interest grounds put forward by the Government prevail over the applicants’ interest in having their respective relationships adequately recognised and protected by law. |
| Other Article violation? | Holds that there is no need to examine the remaining complaints under Articles 8 and 12 of the Convention as well under as Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 8; |
| Damage awarded | the finding of a violation constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants; |
| Documents | Judgment |